Random process derived from Markov process

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of a random process derived from a finite-state Markov jump process. Participants explore the conditions under which the derived process maintains Markovian characteristics, particularly focusing on the relationship between the transition rates and the behavior of a parameterized function.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a Markov jump process defined by transition rates and queries whether a derived process maintains the Markov property under certain conditions.
  • Another participant suggests that the monotonic behavior of the function defining the parameter is crucial for the Markov property to hold, indicating that non-monotonic behavior could disrupt the conditional relationships.
  • A later reply proposes that if the function is assumed to be monotonically increasing, then the Markovian condition may be satisfied, contingent on the positivity of the function.
  • Another participant emphasizes the need to formalize definitions to prove that the limit retains the same form under monotonic conditions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the conditions necessary for the derived process to maintain the Markov property. There is no consensus on the implications of non-monotonic behavior, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the specific requirements for the transition rates.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the importance of the monotonicity of the function and its implications for the Markovian nature of the derived process, but the discussion does not resolve the mathematical steps or assumptions involved.

Mubeena
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I have a query on a Random process derived from Markov process. I have stuck in this problem for more than 2 weeks.
Let r(t) be a finite-state Markov jump process described by
\begin{alignat*}{1}
\lim_{dt\rightarrow 0}\frac{Pr\{r(t+dt)=j/r(t)=i\}}{dt} & =q_{ij}
\end{alignat*}
when i \ne j, and where q_{ij} is the transition rate and represents the probability per time unit that r(t) makes a transition from state $i$ to a
state $j$. Now, let r(\rho(t)) be a random process derived from r(t) depending on a parameter \rho(t), which is defined by
\begin{alignat*}{1}
\frac{d}{dt}\rho(t)=f(r(\rho(t))),\qquad\rho(0)=0
\end{alignat*}
Here f(.) is a piecewise continuous function depending on r(\rho(t))
with range space as \mathbb{R}, a set of Real numbers. In this case can we describe the random process r(\rho(t)) as
\begin{alignat*}{1}
\lim_{dt\rightarrow 0}\frac{\mathrm{Pr}\{r(\rho(t+dt))=j/r(\rho(t))=i\}}{\rho(t+dt)-\rho(t)} =q_{ij},\qquad i\ne j\\
\end{alignat*}
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'll try to fix up the question a little:

Let r(t) be a finite-state Markov jump process described by
\begin{alignat*}{1}
\lim_{dt\rightarrow 0}\frac{Pr\{r(t+dt)=j \ | \ r(t)=i\}}{dt} & =q_{ij}
\end{alignat*} when i \ne j, and where q_{ij} is the transition rate and represents the probability per time unit that r(t) makes a transition from state i to a state j.

For a given real valued piecewise continuous function f(), define \rho(t) by
\begin{alignat*}{1}
\frac{d}{dt}\rho(t)=f(r(\rho(t))),\qquad\rho(0)=0
\end{alignat*}

Does the random process r(\rho(t)) satisfy the following?:

\begin{alignat*}{1}
\lim_{dt\rightarrow 0}\frac{\mathrm{Pr}\{r(\rho(t+dt))=j \ | \ r(\rho(t))=i\}}{\rho(t+dt)-\rho(t)} =q_{ij},\qquad i\ne j\\
\end{alignat*}
 
Last edited:
Hey Mubeena and welcome to the forums.

For this proposition, I have a gut feeling it is true but only if you have specific conditions on the monotonic behavior of p(t).

If you have something that goes up and down then essentially you are screwing up with the ordering of the conditional statement since the Markovian aspect depends on time t with time t + dt and if p(t) starts decreasing then it screws up this forward attribute in time for the conditional distribution and things "reverse".

In short if p(t) is decreasing then p(t+dt) < p(t).

If my reasoning holds, then my best guess is that you can show that the Markovian condition fails because of the above.
 
Hi Stephen and Chiro,
Thank you very much for your help.
By your arguments, If I assume ρ(t) to be monotonically increasing by assuming f(r(ρ(t)))>0, for all t, then the last equality (lim_{dt->0} Pr{}/ρ(t+dt)-ρ(t)=q_ij) holds right?
 
If you want to prove it, you will need to show that the limit has the same form when the function is monotonic.

Once you formalize this in definitions you should be OK (I think).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K